Pre trib rapture teaching is heresy

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

So something the APOSTLE Paul taught and commanded the Church was
neither salvific or important?

Especially something Paul prefaced by saying:

LET NO MAN DECEIVE YOU BY ANY MEANS........

No wonder the Churches are so spiritually bankrupt.

I think there's a difference between a person saying "I don't know, I haven't studied it" or "I've been studying but I'm not yet convinced one way or the other" on the one hand, and someone saying "Who cares? What difference does it make?" on the other hand.

The first case is understandable. The second seems inexcusably lazy and morally relativistic. In my opinion.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I think there's a difference between a person saying "I don't know, I haven't studied it" or "I've been studying but I'm not yet convinced one way or the other" on the one hand, and someone saying "Who cares? What difference does it make?" on the other hand.

The first case is understandable. The second seems inexcusably lazy and morally relativistic. In my opinion.

Agreed

[TGBTG]

Originally Posted by Esaias

I think there's a difference between a person saying "I don't know, I haven't studied it" or "I've been studying but I'm not yet convinced one way or the other" on the one hand, and someone saying "Who cares? What difference does it make?" on the other hand.

The first case is understandable. The second seems inexcusably lazy and morally relativistic. In my opinion.

What do you mean by "understandable?" are you saying such person will not be damned?

And then how about "I have studied it, but come to a different conclusion than you?" is that understandable?

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by TGBTG

What do you mean by "understandable?" are you saying such person will not be damned?

If a person simply hasnt yet studied a subject, and therefore has no opinion, they aren't following a heresy, correct? What don't you understand about the difference between having no opinion vs having an heretical opinion?

And then how about "I have studied it, but come to a different conclusion than you?" is that understandable?

Then one or both of us is WRONG, and it behooves us to figure it out. Don't you agree?

[jediwill83]

Originally Posted by Esaias

If a person simply hasnt yet studied a subject, and therefore has no opinion, they aren't following a heresy, correct? What don't you understand about the difference between having no opinion vs having an heretical opinion?



Then one or both of us is WRONG, and it behooves us to figure it out. Don't you agree?

sounds kinda like light doctrine to me. if you havent studied it you arent responsible.

[Esaias]

Originally Posted by jediwill83

sounds kinda like light doctrine to me. if you havent studied it you arent responsible.

1. That's not "light doctrine".

2. If we are responsible for believing correctly on every Biblical subject independently of any time for study, then nobody ever was saved.

Either we become disciples and continue to learn His Word (which necessarily implies time), or we must know everything correctly at the beginning APART FROM STUDY, or what we believe is irrelevant to our salvation.

Options 2 and 3 are false, leaving option 1 as the correct answer.

Option 3 is false because the Bible warns against believing false doctrines and being damned.

Option 2 is false because it is a physical impossibility, AND because the Bible enjoins us to study and grow in knowledge of Christ.

Option 1 therefore is correct. The Bible tells us to be disciples of Jesus. A disciple is a student, who learns via study and imitation of the Teacher. Study takes time. Being conformed to the image of Christ therefore takes time. Learning sound doctrine takes time.

Case proved.